n5296s

That may have been true once, but now they each have their own ILS:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0712/00375IL28R.PDF
http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0712/00375I28L.PDF

There's also an ILS to 19L. There are only circling approaches to 10L/R, and nothing at all to 1L/R. It's very rare to see landings on 1L/R. I've seen it a couple of times. It must be quite exciting to fly in a 747. While I was waiting to take off recently (as a pax) the Blue Arrows came in to refuel, and their support C130 did a low pass on 28R then circled round to land on 1.

The full list of SFO approaches is here:

http://www.airnav.com/airport/KSFO (you may need to scroll down a bit).

n5296s

747-436

I was lucky enough to be upfront in the jumpseat on a BA 747-400 in 1997 into SFO on 28L. I don;t recall whether we were parallel with someone else but there was a lot of traffic around.

Been in the flightdeck many times in recent years with another airline but nothing has so far beaten the approach into SFO!

memyself

If you haven't seen the approach check it out here on You Tube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3YoE-marko

Of just type in 'Parallel landing at SFO' They have several good pax video's of both parallel and staggered approaches.

Did this myself month ago in a 744 with a AeroMexico 757 alongside - like someone said earlier beware the belly-up to each other scenario in the turn, and if new into SFO, the FO's tendancy to watch the parallel aircraft rather than instruments / ahead.

shorty2rj

Quite frankly it can suck. Outside of getting dumped like Nor CAL always leads you, last time we were told not to OVERTAKE an EMB-120. I was in a fully loaded 737-800 w/150 app speed. Even with the Brasilia going balls to the wall it was ugly, so we had to s-turn right at 900 feet. Real comforting on a two-three mile final! The controllers have got to get more realistic about sticking the props on parallels with the bigger jets. Pain in the @ss to get into, but great layover.

Hand Solo

Eh? There's no ban on visual approaches at SFO in BA.

Taildragger67

Another one by the same photographer.

Shanwick Shanwick

Off to SFO on Friday. I'll take the camera, without any lenses, and try to get a shot of the real view as seen from the flight deck. It's close, but not that close!

Da Dog

well if there is Hand I'm in the poo, last few times, only fun left on the fleet these days..........

I thought the demand a 10 mile final in the NUBRIEF was for management only

TopBunk

Shanwick

I can assure you that the photo is pretty realistic. The runway separation is minimal, and I have touched down simultaneously on 28R (in a 747-400) with one on 28L.

For sure, it doesn't happen on every approach by a long way, but it does happen.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Qantas went around because the captain was handling and lost sight of the other aircraft.

ATC issuing instructions 'do not overtake...' can be unrealistic when you are in a 747 with a final approach speed of 150kts vs a turboprop at 100 or a 737 at 130.

Shanwick Shanwick

TopBunk

As has been pointed out earlier in the thread the photo was taken with a deceiving telephoto lens and doesn't look like that in the flesh. Not during my 100+ approaches into SFO in a 744 anyway.

Brgds
Shanwick

Graybeard

Here's one I took from jumpseat of PSA MD-80 some years back.

Beausoleil

Aside...

So when they say please turn off and stow all electronic devices, does that not apply to video cameras?

As a sometimes nervous flier, camera fanatics are second on my hate list to audiophiles with earphones plugged in so they don't hear the request to turn off electronics. A recent BA flight was the only time I've ever seen a member of cabin crew sort this out.

alaska65

The clearance for the visual at SFO includes a restriction that you not pass the aircraft you are cleared to follow and to keep in sight. Sometimes NORCAL approach sets one up for an especially exciting experience by saying "Maintain visual separation on that aircraft, maintain 170 KIAS to the bridge, cleared for the visual approach 28L (or 28R)". So at the bridge you are fast and the airplane you are following is already slowed, and getting from Flaps 5 to Flaps 30 or 40 seems agonizingly slow while one still attempts to stay within "Stabilized approach parameters."

I too have gone around on that one. What I should have said was "Unable 170 KIAS to the bridge, cleared for the visual 28L."

MrSoft

On the first pic, the fore-shortening effect of the telephoto lens is being over-stated by some posters. There is a little, but not so much. Otherwise you'd be looking at a huge winglet in your face. I would estimate 2x but no more.

On the subsequent photos posted, it's different : a very long lens has obviously been used.

TopBunk

Shanwick

What can I say - I have been there in a 744 (on the flight deck, in the RHS) and it looked remarkably like that, except that he was a medium jet (737/MD8x/A320 type), and as such was relatively smaller visually, but importantly just as close.

Maybe in your 100+ approaches (more than my 30 or so) you have been fortunate?

Shanwick Shanwick

Didn't manage to catch the Continental 737 yesterday for a decent shot.

INNflight

Quite a nice picture from above showing two ac above the rwy's already. Glad the 744 barely fits between the runways too

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0777174/L/

sevenstrokeroll

Beausoleil:

you indicate a problem with video camera being on during flight...and that is a fine statement.

BUT

is it possible, the person taking the pictures from a PSA JET (which merged into usair circa 1988) USED A ...forgive the phrase, FILM CAMERA?

Imagine, a chemical method of obtaining and keeping an image, not using digital technology!

What a breakthrough!

Oh yeah, its been around so long you forgot about it...and the photographer probably just scanned the PICTURE for our benefit.

wow...a non computer camera! amazing!

stue

Don't talk of such witchcraft!!!!!

CityofFlight

I'm scared Aunty Em...I'm scared!